On 4/14/25 2:44 PM, Xiaoyao Li wrote:
On 4/11/2025 3:42 PM, Ewan Hai wrote:
On 4/11/25 11:22 AM, Zhao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:07:15PM +0800, Ewan Hai wrote:
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 22:07:15 +0800
From: Ewan Hai
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fix model number of
On 4/11/2025 3:42 PM, Ewan Hai wrote:
On 4/11/25 11:22 AM, Zhao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:07:15PM +0800, Ewan Hai wrote:
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 22:07:15 +0800
From: Ewan Hai
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fix model number of Zhaoxin
YongFeng
vCPU template
On 4/10/25
On 4/11/25 11:22 AM, Zhao Liu wrote:
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:07:15PM +0800, Ewan Hai wrote:
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 22:07:15 +0800
From: Ewan Hai
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fix model number of Zhaoxin YongFeng
vCPU template
On 4/10/25 8:22 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 4/7
On Thu, Apr 10, 2025 at 10:07:15PM +0800, Ewan Hai wrote:
> Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2025 22:07:15 +0800
> From: Ewan Hai
> Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] target/i386: Fix model number of Zhaoxin YongFeng
> vCPU template
>
> On 4/10/25 8:22 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >
> > O
On 4/10/25 8:22 PM, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
On 4/7/25 04:07, Ewan Hai wrote:
The model number was mistakenly set to 0x0b (11) in commit ff04bc1ac4.
The correct value is 0x5b. This mistake occurred because the extended
model bits in cpuid[eax=0x1].eax were overlooked, and only the base
model was us
On 4/7/25 04:07, Ewan Hai wrote:
The model number was mistakenly set to 0x0b (11) in commit ff04bc1ac4.
The correct value is 0x5b. This mistake occurred because the extended
model bits in cpuid[eax=0x1].eax were overlooked, and only the base
model was used.
This patch corrects the model field.
The model number was mistakenly set to 0x0b (11) in commit ff04bc1ac4.
The correct value is 0x5b. This mistake occurred because the extended
model bits in cpuid[eax=0x1].eax were overlooked, and only the base
model was used.
This patch corrects the model field.
Fixes: ff04bc1ac4 ("target/i386: In
